Myth #178: On Stalin's orders, the MGB falsified the case of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee and then brutally dealt with its leadership.
Myth No. 179. Stalin ordered the assassination of the outstanding Soviet actor, chairman of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee S. Mikhoels (Vovsi).
Myth No. 180. Due to the Judeophobia and anti-Semitism that dominated his character, Stalin falsified the “case of the poisoning doctors” (Jews) after the war.
Myth #181: As a staunch anti-Semite and anti-Semite, Stalin planned to deport all Jews from large cities to special concentration camps in remote areas of the country.
So many lies, so many vile things, so many base deeds have been heaped upon all of this that the myths mentioned in the title could, perhaps, rightfully claim a place in the renowned Guinness Book of Records. For the "democratically minded intelligentsia," this is the favorite anti-Stalinist chewing gum. But what really happened? Let's start with the Jewish Anti-Stalinist Committee case.
Let me offer you the contents of a short chapter, “The Case of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee,” from Sigismund Mironin’s brilliant book, “The Riddle of ’37: Stalin’s Order.”
(M., 2007, pp. 143–158) accompanied by brief comments by the author of this book.
The Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee (JAC – A.M.) was created during the war (February-March 1942), as it was proclaimed, to unite anti-fascist forces in the fight against fascist genocide. Its real, pragmatic goal was to extract funds from American Jewish magnates to wage the war against fascism.
A quick comment. I'd like to correct my esteemed colleague slightly. While not an anti-Semite, let alone a Judeophobe, Stalin incorporated the "Jewish factor" into the fight against Germany from the very first months of the war. As early as August 24, 1941, the first radio meeting of Jewish representatives took place on Moscow Radio, exposing the Nazi atrocities on Soviet territory and calling on Jews to actively fight the enemy. This marks the beginning of the prehistory of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee, which began to take shape during our glorious counteroffensive near Moscow. On December 15, 1941, the distinguished Soviet artist and actor S. M. Mikhoels (a pseudonym; his real name was Vovsi) was nominated and approved for the post of Chairman of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee, and Sh. Epshteyn became Executive Secretary. And on February 5, 1942, proposals on the functions, structure and tasks of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee were already considered and approved, including the following:
— “firstly, by means of propaganda, to set the world public in a pro-Soviet direction by establishing contacts with Jewish international organizations,
— and, secondly, to attract a broad flow of Western aid to Russia.”
Stalin's skillful yet respectful involvement in the deadly struggle against Nazism, while involving the "Jewish factor" in Stalin's war on the Jews, played a crucial role, and his contemporaries are obliged to know this. For example, as the history of Soviet foreign policy intelligence attests, the acute threat of a second front of aggression against the USSR involving Japan in the second half of 1941 was eliminated, in part and primarily, through the active use of the "Jewish factor," something Stalin was well aware of. Virtually all of the agents and trusted contacts of Soviet intelligence involved in Operation Snow, which pursued precisely this goal, were among the most influential Jews in US President Roosevelt's entourage. [4] We must also not forget that it was in no small part thanks to the "Jewish factor" that the Finnish army's advance on Leningrad was not only seriously slowed but actually halted in 1941. It was precisely the US threats against Finland that played a decisive role in Finland significantly moderating its militant ardor. But before this happened, the Jewish lobby in Roosevelt's entourage had done a superb job. This, of course, doesn't mean that Mannerheim extended a hand of friendship to Moscow—it's time to put an end to all these fairy tales about Finland's "Führer," supposedly out of the kindness of his heart and nostalgia (Mannerheim had long lived, served, and studied in St. Petersburg), halting the advance on Leningrad. Like any other politician, Carl Gustaf Mannerheim understood only the argument of force, which is precisely what the United States demonstrated to him at Stalin's request! I emphasize that the "Jewish factor," skillfully and artfully incorporated by Stalin into the struggle for power, played a significant role in this! With the help of the same “Jewish factor,” Finland was eventually removed from the war in 1944 – with the assistance of the world-famous Jewish banking clan, the Wallenbergs.
The Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (EAC) was created under the Soviet Information Bureau, and the Information Bureau itself was part of the Council of Ministers (Sovnarkom). The chairman of the Information Bureau in 1947 was S.A. Lozovsky, a member of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), who also served on the leadership of the EAC. S. Mikhoels was the chairman of the EAC, as he was the most widely known artist and public figure both in the USSR and abroad. As a celebrity, he was allowed freedom of action, but, of course, within certain limits. Mikhoels' deputy, who accompanied him on his foreign trips and, in essence, the chief administrator of this organization, was the poet I.S. Fefer. Fefer was a major NKVD (MGB ) agent, "supervised" by State Security Commissioner Leonid Raikhman.
The following poets and writers became members of the JAC: I.S. Fefer, L.M. Kvitko, P.D. Markish, D.R. Berelson, S.Z. Galkin, artistic director of the Moscow State Jewish Theater (GOSET) V.L. Zuskin, chief physician of the Botkin Central Clinical Hospital B.A. Shimeliovich, director of the Institute of Physiology of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences, academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences L.S. Shtern, and others. The committee had its own printed organ, the newspaper "Eynikait" ("Unity"), which was distributed in the USSR and abroad. During trips to the USA, carried out on assignment from the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), S. Mikhoels and other members of the JAC communicated with representatives of the Jewish cultural elite of the USA. In 1946, S. Mikhoels was awarded the Stalin Prize for creating the play "Freilekhs" based on Jewish musical folklore. Stalin's behavior towards Jewish culture once again proves that he did not suffer from any anti-Semitism.
Toward the end of the war, members of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee, especially Mikhoels, became involved in the specific fates of Jewish refugees who had escaped from the ghetto or returned from evacuation (obtaining residence permits and housing, employment, financial assistance), as well as those who had been unfairly dismissed or rejected from university on ethnic grounds. This work was not part of the committee's mandate and was effectively illegal and anti-Soviet (under the laws in effect at the time – AM). Among the initiatives undertaken by Mikhoels and Fefer after returning from the United States was a letter to Molotov requesting the creation of a Jewish Autonomous Region in Northern Crimea, where several Jewish collective farms had existed before the war. A representative of the Jewish bourgeois-nationalist organization "Joint" promised them large sums of money for the resettlement of Jews in Crimea. This letter had only one consequence: in the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee case, it was used as evidence of treason [(The Joint, according to the MGB, had a plan to turn Crimea into an American foothold in the region). Incidentally, this wasn't some kind of fabrication or the product of idle speculation on the part of state security agencies, but precise knowledge based on intelligence information. – A.M. ], and exposed the defendants to Article 58, a death penalty.
Soon after the war, the MGB discovered an unhealthy interest in Stalin's personal life on the part of Zionist circles abroad. This interest was primarily due to the fact that the main international issue in 1947 was the plan to create the state of Israel. The success of this plan, implemented through the UN, depended largely on the position of the USSR and its friends. Information about Stalin's personal life published in the West indicated the presence of an "internal" source close to Stalin, or even several sources. Disclosing details about Stalin's personal life in the USSR was interpreted as divulging state secrets (incidentally, at that time, and even today, such disclosures are still interpreted as such, which, of course, is nothing out of the ordinary. – A.M. ). Minister of State Security Abakumov received a new assignment: monitoring information leaks.
The first suspicions fell on the relatives of Stalin's second wife, Anna Sergeyevna and Yevgenia Alliluyeva. In 1946, A.S. Alliluyeva published the book "Memoirs," which inevitably included the topic of Stalin. This book was, in a way, a continuation of the work of her father, S. Ya. Alliluyeva, who was a friend not only of Stalin but also of Lenin. Stalin had known him since 1903. Shortly before his death in 1945, S. Ya. Alliluyev, Stalin's father-in-law, began writing a book of memoirs, which covered events only up to 1905. It was published in 1946 with a foreword by M.I. Kalinin. S. Ya. Alliluyev died at the age of 79. After publishing her book of memoirs, A.S. Alliluyeva also began giving lectures on the history of the revolution. In these lectures, she had to answer various questions. In May 1947, Alliluyeva's memoirs were criticized in Pravda and subsequently withdrawn from circulation. She was also advised to cease her lecture tours. Critical conversations about Stalin were also recorded by surveillance equipment in E.A. Alliluyeva's home.
The first to be arrested, in early December 1947, was E.A. Alliluyeva, accused of anti-Soviet activity and spreading slander against the head of the Soviet government. A few days later, her husband, Molochnikov, was also arrested. In January 1948, A.S. Alliluyeva was also arrested, facing the same charges. I.I. Goldstein and Z.G. Grinberg became friends with the Alliluyevs and Molochnikov. Goldstein, an economist, worked with Molochnikov and Pavel Alliluyev at the USSR Trade Mission in Berlin from 1929 to 1933. Grinberg, a writer and S.M. Mikhoels' collaborator in the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee, who also visited Alliluyeva's apartment, introduced the artist to Stalin's relatives.
Already during her first interrogations in December 1947, E.A. Alliluyeva reported that Goldstein was interested in Stalin's family, particularly the family of Svetlana and Grigory Morozov. During interrogations in the MGB prison, conducted under the personal supervision of Abakumov, Goldstein testified that he had collected information about Stalin at the request of Mikhoels, the chairman of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee. The arrested Z.G. Grinberg also testified that Mikhoels had shown an interest in the leader's personal life and was reporting this information to the West. And this activity was clearly anti-Soviet.
A brief comment. Of course, since the "thaw" of Trotskyist Khrushchev, it's generally accepted that all these confessions were coerced out of them. This belief is still being cultivated with particular zeal. But who has ever considered the following: was this information worth using coercive methods against the defendants?! After all, the MGB had impartial technical monitoring data, or wiretaps, and the Chekists had no need to resort to force to obtain such data. If any of the defendants in this case concealed anything, then, based on this and other data, they were told outright that on such-and-such a date at such-and-such a time they had such-and-such conversations on such-and-such topics. The investigators then demanded that he tell the whole truth about who initiated these conversations, their content (this was done to compare with technical control data and determine the sincerity and veracity of the testimony), and to whom they were communicated. This is a standard investigative technique, and one that doesn't require even the slightest hint of coercive tactics. Everything here is based on psychological shock. Incidentally, this investigative practice is global, not just Soviet. That's the first point.
Secondly, to this day, the charges against those accused in the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee case for espionage and treason are considered trumped-up. But this is far from the case. In fact, it's not the case at all. First, consider the circumstance discussed above regarding the use of the "Jewish factor" by Soviet intelligence during the Great Patriotic War. Soviet state security agencies were not the first to discover it. This factor is exploited by anyone who has the opportunity. But—and pay special attention to this—if Soviet intelligence exploited this factor to achieve Soviet foreign policy goals, then why should we assume that American intelligence agencies and the World Zionist Organization, which possesses a unique intelligence service, did not (and do not) exploit this same factor?! Especially at the time when the state of Israel was being established. The need for any information that could contribute to the resolution of this issue, then crucial for Jews worldwide, was unprecedentedly great. Especially for the leaders of Zionism.
To make it easier to understand what we are talking about, and to finally dot the i's, allow me to quote a unique confession from Jacob de Haas, the personal secretary of Theodor Herzl, the founder of structured political Zionism. In February 1928, he wrote in the American Jewish journal Menorah Journal : "A true organization does not flaunt its true capabilities with or without reason. However, when necessary, this form of demonstration must not be overlooked. The great strength of the American Zionist Organization lay (and lies—A.M.) in the innumerable contacts and connections it had, in its thorough knowledge of those who controlled the human resources that formed the basis of these contacts. Didn't the British need to obtain a reliable informant in Odessa, didn't they need a trusted agent in Harbin (China— A.M.) ? And when President Wilson demanded, as soon as possible, a thousand-word summary detailing the forces behind Kerensky's rise to power in Russia… all these services were provided by the New York (Zionist) center, claiming nothing but receiving much—the respect and goodwill of the leaders whose signatures sealed these great deeds. Thousands of Zionists worked everywhere and served faithfully in their deeply entrenched positions…"
I hope it's now clear that the accusations of espionage were not empty. However, I would like to immediately caution those who might see this as grounds for the thesis of "Jewish evil." The use of ethnic diasporas in other countries for intelligence purposes is extremely characteristic of virtually all intelligence agencies worldwide, especially the largest ones. This is one of the most important methods of operation for virtually all intelligence agencies worldwide; it is their most important recruiting base. So, Jews are by no means alone in this regard. Therefore, one should not see this as any special evil on the part of Jews. This would be fundamentally wrong. On the contrary, it is necessary to study their wealth of experience with due respect, in order to effectively apply similar techniques and methods in the interests of our homeland and, if necessary, to counter attempts to ferret out information from us.
And thirdly, under no circumstances should the facts under investigation be considered a manifestation of anti-Semitism, especially at the state level. Let me remind you once again that, according to an excellent expert on the Jewish question during Stalin's time,
Zhores Medvedev: "Stalin was neither an anti-Semite, nor even a Judeophobe. Judeophobia is a morbid hatred of any representative of the Jewish nation... Stalin did not have this. There is not a single statement—either in his official speeches or in archival documents—that could be cited as anti-Semitic." As for those cases in which Jews were involved, Medvedev rightly believes that they should be considered not from the standpoint of Stalin's alleged Judeophobia, but solely from the standpoint of the external and internal political climate of the time, which he strongly recommends.
Germany's defeat in the war and the creation of the State of Israel (which, incidentally, the Soviet Union was the first to recognize—AM) deprived the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee of its primary tasks. Therefore, after the war, the primary focus of the JAC members became collecting documentary materials for the "Black Book" on Nazi atrocities against Jews (this idea had arisen independently among many, including A. Einstein, I. Ehrenburg, and others). Ehrenburg, who co-authored this book with V. Grossman, wanted to publish it in Russian. However, this was not in the interests of the Soviet government and, in fact, exceeded the JAC's mandate.
A brief comment. S. Mironin's assertion that the publication of the "Black Book" was not in the interests of the Soviet government may seem rather strange. But this was indeed the case. And here's why. As is well known, the Slavic peoples of the USSR, primarily the great Russian people, bore the brunt of the war and suffering in the Great Patriotic War. This is, for one thing, because even in purely geographical terms, Hitler's aggression rolled like a heavy steamroller across their area of residence within Soviet territory. And the sacrifices suffered by the Slavic peoples of the USSR were unprecedentedly enormous. This, one would think, is undisputed. That's on the one hand. On the other, in the immediate postwar period, the Soviet Union's losses in the war were acknowledged at 6-7 million people. This was primarily due to political motives, although the widespread ignorance of the true level of losses cannot be discounted either. Ведь перепись-то населения была проведена не сразу после войны, а чуть позже (правда, в узком кругу Сталин говаривал, что война выбила примерно 30 млн человек). Так вот, в такой ситуации публикация «Черной книги», в которой достаточно точно указывались цифры замученных и расстрелянных гитлеровцами советских евреев — примерно один миллион человек, — привела бы к обратному эффекту, то есть не к необходимому человеческому состраданию, а, наоборот, к взрыву бытовой юдофобии. Потому что при всем том, что славные сыны еврейского народа тоже принимали активнейшее участие в войне и проявили себя на полях сражений как храбрые и мужественные воины, 108 из которых были удостоены звания Героя Советского Союза, [5] публикация «Черной книги» сформировала бы в общественном сознании СССР, мягко говоря, не совсем точное впечатление о значимости и тяжести понесенных евреями жертв в войне. If the officially recognized figure of losses in the war was 6-7 million people, then it would turn out that every sixth or seventh person killed in the war was a Jew.
It's perfectly natural for a normal person to honor the memory of those who perished in the fight against Nazism during that terrible war, including Jews. But it's equally natural to remember that the main victims were precisely the Slavic peoples, and above all, the Russian people! And in such a position, there's not even a hint of any anti-Semitism, much less a denial of the Jewish sacrifices. The essence of such a position lies elsewhere entirely. And it was best expressed by that outstanding representative of the Jewish intelligentsia, the great violinist of the 20th century, a man of exceptional intelligence and stunning nobility—Yehudi Menuhin (incidentally, a native of Russia). About fifteen years ago, in an interview with an NTV correspondent, he declared: "Jews have no right to a monopoly on compassion. The Russian people bore the greatest sacrifices in World War II."
This is why the attempt to publish the "Black Book" was not welcomed by the Soviet government, as it understood perfectly well what it could lead to. The country was in ruins, and the absolute unity of the Soviet people, and certainly not ethnic discord, was absolutely essential for the restoration of the national economy. However, the Soviet government never, under any circumstances, forgot the contribution of Jews to our common Victory, much less the Nazi atrocities against the Jewish population of the USSR. Based on the facts, it was the first in the world to publicly declare this back in early 1942. Therefore, Germany was presented with a special bill.
In 1947, the printing of the Black Book was stopped, and part of the already printed edition was transferred to the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee, which, in violation of Soviet laws, sent copies of the Black Book to the West (back in 1946 – A.M. ), where it was published.
Please note. The Union of Jewish Scientists, Artists, and Writers of the USA decided to publish "The Black Book" in English, together with the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee, earlier than in the USSR. The book was published in the USA in early 1946, and a significant portion of the print run was delivered to the Nuremberg Trials. This means that "The Black Book" drew the world's attention to the mass extermination of European Jews by the Nazis. The Holocaust would be discussed later, but "The Black Book" opened a series of truthful documentary testimonies and recollections of the experiences of Jews in Europe and the USSR.
Why wasn't the publication of the "Black Book" in the interests of the Soviet government? Because it revealed many secrets that, according to the laws of the Cold War, should not have been made public. Regardless of the assessment of the necessity of publishing the "Black Book" abroad, such behavior by the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (JAC) once again underscores that the JAC pursued its own policy, independent of the interests of the Soviet state. Therefore, the JAC gradually came to be perceived as a dangerous organizational and nationalist center.
A quick comment. This time, I have to seriously correct my esteemed colleague. Of course, there's nothing, absolutely nothing wrong with the Black Book drawing the world's attention to the facts of the Nazis' mass extermination of Jews. And there's even less wrong with the fact that it uncovered a series of truthful documentary testimonies and recollections of Jewish experiences. But the focus should be on Soviet Jews, not European Jews, since the book described Nazi atrocities against them. They were the primary targets of all Nazi atrocities.
Secondly, what laws of the Cold War did the esteemed colleague deign to speak of?! After all, it had only just begun and hadn't yet gained any momentum, much less formed any "laws" of its own, and hadn't even acquired any special secrets yet! Its entire idiotic secret lay in Churchill's Fulton speech, the contents of which were known to the entire world. That's the point. The main point is that the appearance of the "Black Book" at the Nuremberg Trials and the extremely widespread publicity it generated in the Western media created a situation in which the incalculable losses of the Slavic peoples of the USSR, especially the Russian people, were somehow overshadowed. After all, the nation-forming people of the USSR—the main victor in World War II and one of the chief prosecutors at the Nuremberg Trials—were precisely the Russian people, who bore the brunt of the war. Moreover, The USSR, the Ukrainian SSR, and the Byelorussian SSR—also severely damaged by the war—were already members of the UN. Meanwhile, the appearance of the "Black Book" at the Nuremberg Trials seemed to subtly shape the narrative of Jewish retribution against the Nazis (including on behalf of the USSR), even though the Nuremberg Trials were the work of the United Nations. It should be clear, even without further explanation, why the Soviet government was clearly not thrilled with this far from "artistic amateurism" of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee.
On October 12, 1946, the USSR Ministry of State Security sent a memorandum to the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) entitled "On the Nationalist Manifestations of Certain Workers of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee." M.A. Suslov, head of the Central Committee's Foreign Policy Department, organized an investigation and reported the findings to the Central Committee on November 19 of that year. The decision noted that the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee had played a positive role during the war, but after the war, its activities were deemed politically harmful. According to Suslov, these activities were becoming increasingly nationalist and Zionist in nature and objectively contributed to the strengthening of the "Jewish reactionary bourgeois-nationalist movement abroad and the fueling of nationalist Zionist sentiments among a certain segment of the USSR population."
A brief comment. If we set aside the ideological cliches of the time, we see the following. Summarizing the above comments, it should be noted that the Soviet leadership expressed dissatisfaction with the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (JAC) deliberately acquiring functions inappropriate for a socio-political organization, especially one created to achieve clearly defined goals during the war. These functions increasingly began to resemble some semblance of a government representing the interests of the Jewish population. The Soviet leadership, especially its senior members, especially Stalin himself, was well aware of how Jewish public organizations were transforming into socio-political organizations, and then into political ones (based on Zionist ideas), representing the interests of the Jewish populations of their countries.
From its very inception, the entire history of structured political Zionism (the World Zionist Organization was founded in 1896) unfolded before the eyes of Soviet leaders. They were also aware of the role of the Jewish Bund in the history of the revolutionary movement in Russia, including the emergence of the Russian Social Democratic Party. Therefore, they were deprived of the opportunity to underestimate the power and role of Jewish organizations. Moreover, during the war, they themselves exploited these factors to the advantage of the USSR. Having become a monopoly party due to a number of historical circumstances, the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) had no intention of sharing power in the country with anyone. The Soviet government, headed by Stalin, held a similar position. And even more so, neither intended to share power with an organization that increasingly identified itself with the goals, objectives, and activities of a foreign organization, led by citizens of states that became hostile to the Soviet Union after World War II. Not to mention Stalin's characteristic division of Jews into ordinary Jews and Jewish nationalists. Moreover, it should be borne in mind that the Soviet state security agencies were well acquainted with the activities of Zionist organizations, including the very same Joint, with which the members of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee were accused of having connections.
At one time—until 1930 — the Leningrad Jewish Aid Committee, known as LEKOPO for short , existed in the USSR . Its predecessors were the Jewish Charitable Society, registered by the Petrograd Executive Committee in August 1919, and the Jewish Mutual Aid Society. The statute establishing the Jewish Charitable Society stated: "The Society aims to provide assistance to the underprivileged population of the city of Petrograd, and to this end proposes to issue interest-free loans and cash benefits, maintain and organize Jewish kosher canteens..." and so on. It would seem, well, what's so supernatural or suspicious about this? On the surface, it seems fine. However, the minutes of the January 10, 1930 meeting of the Workers' and Peasants' Inspectorate of the Central City District of Leningrad regarding the liquidation of LEKOPO stated: "The artels organized by LEKOPO accepted merchants in debt to OBAFO, and not only Jewish merchants but also other nationalities were accepted. Having assumed the responsibility of assisting poor Jews, LEKOPO provided every possible support to the merchants, hiding them under its own firm from the regional finance department. The artels were headed by individuals who had no understanding of production... Aizberg, Aesman. LEKOPO served as a link with religious organizations, supported nationalist sentiments, engaged in commercial activities (an auction hall), and had class aliens in its leadership."
But that's far from all. In 1927, a certain I. Sh. Schneerson left the USSR for Latvia to take the post of Chief Rabbi of Riga. For some reason, his route to Latvia took a circuitous route—via Germany, where he met with two prominent representatives of American Zionist capital. After this, Schneerson himself underwent a remarkable metamorphosis: it was after this meeting that he became a central figure in organizing the transfer of large sums of money from the American Zionist organization "Joint" to its agents in the USSR. And LEKOPO, as the OGPU had already established, was one of the main "covers" covering the activities of Joint agents in the USSR. This is why the USSR's state security agencies had long been well acquainted with the Joint's activities.
On November 26, Stalin was presented with these materials (the MGB memo and the materials of the investigation organized by Suslov – A.M.) . Soon, as already mentioned, Z.G. Grinberg, a research fellow at the USSR Academy of Sciences, was arrested and interrogated. He reported that the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee, and S.M. Mikhoels personally, intended to exploit the marriage of Svetlana Alliluyeva (Stalin's daughter) to the Jew G. Morozov to resolve the issue of establishing a Jewish republic in Crimea. Mikhoels himself was already opposed to the idea at this time, but Fefer and some other committee members had a different opinion.
A brief comment. It should be noted here that during the war, the so-called Jewish question assumed significant significance in the USSR's foreign and domestic policy, particularly in light of its relations with its allies in the anti-Hitler coalition, primarily the United States and Great Britain. The Allied policy shift toward truly effective support for the USSR in the fight against Nazi Germany, primarily through Lend-Lease, was achieved, in part, through the Jewish factor, as discussed above. At the same time, the Soviet leadership openly hoped to receive significant funds for economic reconstruction under the guise of aid to the Jewish population of the USSR. In fact, this is precisely why, during the war, it expressed a willingness to discuss the creation of a Jewish republic in Crimea. Furthermore, the flip side of this was a certain flirtation with Western Zionist circles, in which the "Palestinian question" was played as a trump card. Moreover, this was done in two directions: both in relation to Zionist organizations and in relation to Great Britain, which feared for the post-war future of its positions in the Middle East, and therefore prevented the mass resettlement of Jews to Palestine and the formation of a Jewish state there.
The idea of establishing a Jewish republic in Crimea with Stalin's sanction was used by Soviet intelligence as a powerful pretext for establishing contacts with the leadership of the Zionist movement in America, under the direction of our intelligence station in the United States, in 1943–1944. This mission was precisely what Sergei Mikhoels carried out when he traveled to the United States at the head of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (JAC) delegation. Incidentally, it was under the cover of his mission that Soviet intelligence established contact with the leadership of the very same American Zionist organization, the Joint.
During their visit to America, S. Mikhoels and I. Fefer brilliantly resolved the political and economic challenges set before them. The idea of establishing a Jewish republic in Crimea was so influential that it even attracted the interest of one of the most influential American businessmen, Eric Johnston, president of the American Chamber of Commerce. He and American Ambassador Averell Harriman met with Stalin in June 1944. During the audience, they discussed the revival of regions that had previously been the main settlements of the Jewish population in the USSR (particularly Belarus), as well as the resettlement of Jews in Crimea. The issue reached the highest level: at Molotov's suggestion, the leadership of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee prepared a letter addressed to Stalin justifying the creation of a Jewish republic in Crimea.
However, almost simultaneously, the already problematic feasibility of implementing this idea was thoroughly undermined by several factors, the most important of which are the following. First, the Americans, even verbally, agreed to provide only tied loans and technical assistance, specifically for the reconstruction of those areas where the Jewish population would reside. Such a personalized provision of aid was unacceptable to the Soviet Union, as it would immediately lead to an explosion of common anti-Semitism among the majority of the population, especially in the Slavic republics, which had suffered extremely severely during the war. Incidentally, even after the idea of this project was completely abandoned in 1947, the situation remained precisely this way.
The distinguished Soviet intelligence ace P.A. Sudoplatov recounts in his memoirs the essence of a telephone conversation between First Secretary of the Communist Party of Ukraine N.S. Khrushchev and First Secretary of the Communist Party of Uzbekistan Usman Yusupov. After complaining during this conversation that Jews evacuated to Tashkent and Samarkand during the war were "flocking back to Ukraine like crows" (as Khrushchev himself put it), Khrushchev asked that the flow of Jews returning from evacuation be halted as much as possible, as there was simply no space for them to resettle in Ukraine, the cities having been destroyed. The situation in Ukraine was fraught with the possibility of anti-Jewish pogroms. After all, Jews returning from evacuation demanded housing, work, and so on, which the authorities were unable to provide, especially immediately and in full, as they had to consider the needs of the native Ukrainian population. Meanwhile, the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee began to actively intervene in these processes, trying in every possible way to protect the interests of Jews in property and housing matters.
Of course, the Jewish Anti-Semitism Committee's initiatives were, on the whole, businesslike. However, it was precisely the inappropriate, unprecedented insistence on addressing issues affecting only the vital interests of Jews, amidst the general devastation, post-war poverty, and deprivation of the indigenous Ukrainian population, that automatically provoked extreme irritation among both the republic's authorities and the population itself. This is precisely why Khrushchev feared anti-Jewish pogroms. Overall, the situation was one described by the "classics of scientifically grounded banditry": "I begin to understand French anti-Semitism," wrote F. Engels, "when I see how these Jews of Polish origin with German surnames infiltrate everywhere, appropriate everything, and push forward everywhere, even to the point of shaping public opinion in the beacon city…" (Karl Marx and F. Engels, Works, vol. 38, p. 345). In fact, it was precisely to avoid such situations that Stalin demanded that the Americans provide untied loans and technical assistance, that is, not condition their provision solely on the restoration of areas of compact Jewish settlement.
Secondly, the atomic bomb factor intervened in this process. In 1943, Stalin apparently somehow managed to reach some kind of agreement with the leadership of the American and, especially, the global Zionist movement, the essence of which was as follows. The leadership of the American and, especially, the global Zionist movement would provide strictly confidential assistance in transferring to the USSR all the US scientific, technical, scientific-technological, and technological secrets necessary for the production of an atomic bomb, as well as the strategic materials necessary for organizing such production in the initial stage. The only thing Stalin could guarantee in exchange was to support the idea of creating a Jewish state in Palestine with the USSR's authority. He could offer nothing else in return. On the one hand, because he had nothing else. Discussions about creating a Jewish republic in Crimea were clearly a distraction, with an eye on possible financial assistance for post-war reconstruction. On the other hand, nothing else interested the leadership of global Zionism. It was determined to end the British Mandate for Palestine and establish a Jewish state there, which already existed de facto by the end of the war. Moreover, certain circles in the United States were also interested in driving Britain out of the Middle East.
Whatever one may say, this agreement was a kind of remake of a story of military-industrial espionage from the time of the First World War, as a result of which the leaders of world Zionism finally achieved the creation of a Jewish national homeland in Palestine under a British protectorate.
We are talking about the famous "acetone" story. Its essence is as follows. With the help of the Zionists, primarily the leader of the World Zionist Organization (WZO) himself, Chaim Weizmann, a brilliant chemist who had previously worked for the German military department and, after moving to England, headed the military chemistry department at the British Admiralty, the technology for producing artificial acetone, which is essential for the production of gunpowder, was transferred from Germany to England. [6] The technology was developed by the German chemist Fritz Taber (a Jew by nationality), who at one time headed the military chemistry department of the German military department and personally knew Weizmann. At the same time, German diplomatic codes also reached England. The service was not forgotten. And soon, under British auspices, a Jewish national home was organized in Palestine.
Apparently, Stalin at one time became aware of an extremely important fact, the reality of which was acknowledged after the war by one of the world's most influential Zionist newspapers, the Johannesburg-based Jewish Herald. In its November 10, 1950, issue, it published an article whose author asserted the following. When work on atomic weapons began in the United States, "Dr. Weizmann (that is, Chaim Weizmann, head of the World Zionist Organization – AM) was asked to gather several of the most prominent Jewish scientists and organize them into a group that could impose conditions on the Allies in the interests of Jewry." The author of the article claimed to have personally seen the relevant document, compiled and given to Weizmann by a scientist renowned for his military inventions. But to impose conditions on the Allies of the anti-Hitler coalition, Weizmann had to have a unique trump card. This unique trump card was the collection of American secrets of atomic bomb production.
It's difficult to say with absolute certainty to what extent, at what stage, and in what roles Mikhoels, Feffer, and other JAC leaders participated in the practical implementation of this remake, but the fact remains—they were more than involved in organizing the acquisition of intelligence on the atomic issue. P.A. Sudoplatov openly acknowledged in his memoirs that Mikhoels and Feffer played a significant role in the intelligence operation to establish contacts with scientists close to Einstein and specialists involved in the development of atomic weapons. With the assistance of Mikhoels and Feffer, contact was established both with these individuals and with the Konenkovs, a married couple of Russian émigrés close to the Einstein family (the head of the family was a distinguished Russian sculptor). In fact, a channel was established for the flow of, albeit oral, but very important information about the prospects of atomic weapons (in the terminology of that time, “new superweapons”), discussed in Princeton with the participation of the outstanding scientists of the 20th century, Fermi and Oppenheimer.
Was it worth it? Absolutely! The Jews got their state, and to their credit, to this day they remember and sincerely honor the Soviet Union's role in the creation and recognition of the State of Israel—after all, the USSR not only voted for the creation of a Jewish state, but was also the first great power to recognize it. And the Soviet Union, albeit through intelligence channels but with the help of Jewish agents, obtained all the necessary secrets for producing atomic weapons. With these secrets, as well as relying on their own research, Soviet scientists quickly eliminated the US atomic monopoly.
Moreover, confidential deliveries of highly strategic raw materials for scientific research and atomic bomb production were quietly integrated into the American Lend-Lease program. These included rare earth metals such as beryllium, cadmium, cobalt ore and its concentrate, cobalt metal and cobalt scrap, uranium metal, special aluminum pipes, graphite, thorium, uranium nitrate, uranium oxide, uranium oxide, and much more. And in fairly large quantities. For example, based on what is known, the amount of uranium shipped to the USSR at that time was one kilogram, graphite - almost 170 kg, rare earth metals of all types, as well as uranium nitrate, uranium oxide and uranium oxide - about the same amount, etc. Even various equipment that was formally listed as civilian, upon closer examination, it turns out, was oriented towards the creation of an industrial base for the production of nuclear weapons.
So, by all accounts, the game was more than worth the candle!
Almost immediately after the war, the question of Crimea disappeared as if by itself—in June 1945, by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Crimea was transformed into an administrative region within the RSFSR. And in late 1945, the former allies of the anti-Hitler coalition, contrary to all previous agreements, separately created the Anglo-American Committee on Palestine, without inviting the Soviet Union to participate. This gave Stalin the perfect pretext to launch a campaign for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine in April 1946. In other words, he strictly adhered to his obligations under the secret agreement—atomic secrets in exchange for support for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
Ultimately, Mikhoels, who had considerable knowledge of these issues, realized that the idea of creating a Jewish republic in Crimea should be abandoned. And, according to Sudoplatov, he changed his position. However, his colleagues in the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee, particularly Fefer and others who wielded considerable influence within the committee, failed to draw the necessary conclusions and continued to press the issue. All would have been well had extremely alarming reports not simultaneously begun to emerge through intelligence channels regarding plans by the US, Great Britain, and even France to organize a new world war against the USSR using nuclear weapons. Moreover, these plans clearly outlined the goal of dismembering the Soviet Union as much as possible, cutting off its access to the seas, especially the oceans. Crimea, in this regard, was a key location. Furthermore, it should be noted that intelligence information simultaneously began to emerge regarding US and British attempts to create a Mediterranean military-political bloc oriented against the USSR. As a result, a situation arose in which the persistent requests of some Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (JAC) leaders to create a Jewish republic in Crimea clearly aligned with the West's aggressive plans against the USSR. And the more the JAC leaders pressed this issue, the more suspicion they aroused in the Kremlin. However, let us return to the chapter from S. Mironin's book.
Matters became increasingly complicated after the death of Solomon Mikhoels in Minsk on January 13, 1948. Following Mikhoels' death, relations between the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee and the Soviet leadership became increasingly strained.
A brief comment. To this day, the absolute lie that Mikhoels was killed on Stalin's orders is being zealously promoted. But neither Stalin nor the state security agencies had anything to do with Mikhoels's death. To our deepest regret, he and his companion, Golubev, were in a routine car accident. I specifically emphasize that it was a routine accident, meaning an accident not orchestrated by anyone. One of the defendants in the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee case, Zuskin, testified during the trial: "On the morning of the 14th, the coffin containing Mikhoels's body arrived in Moscow. Before that, Academician Zbarsky, who was friends with Mikhoels, called us and said that as soon as the coffin arrived at the theater, we should call him, as he wanted to inspect the body's condition and whether it could be laid out for a memorial service. And at 11 o’clock, as soon as the body arrived, Academician Zbarsky, Vovsi (Mikhoels’ brother) and the artist Tyshler arrived.
When they opened the galvanized coffin, there were five of us near the coffin, we saw a broken nose, a solid bruise on the left cheek, and then Academician Zbarsky announced to me that he would take the body to his institute, where he would treat the face so that it could be put on display...
When Zbarsky came to the funeral, he told me that Mikhoels' death was undoubtedly the result of a car accident, and explained that one arm was broken and later the same cheek was bruised. This happened when one car, traveling in the opposite direction, collided with another, and they were both thrown aside, meaning they died as a result of the impact. And then he told me that he died a good death. If he had received immediate medical attention, perhaps something could have been done, but he died of freezing, having been lying in the snow for several hours.
Citing Zuskin's testimony in his book, "The Assassination of Stalin and Beria," Yu. I. Mukhin notes: "Thus, two medical academics, one of whom was the deceased's brother, determined that no car had run over Mikhoels' front or rear tires (this very fabrication, for some reason, is constantly being circulated in literature, including at the instigation of Sudoplatov. - A.M.), that only his arm and nose were broken, and that if a random passerby had noticed him at that time and simply carried him into the house or brought him back to consciousness (the tragedy occurred on one of the unlit, deserted streets of post-war Minsk), then Mikhoels would have remained alive, since the cause of his death was hypothermia. So what are all the fakes about his "assassination" worth?
One more thing. It's clear that if Mikhoels had actually been murdered, if Beria had actually arrested those involved in the murder with the consent of the Presidium of the Central Committee, then starting with the "exposure of the personality cult," it would have been shouted from the rooftops. But this was kept quiet until perestroika, and for good reason. The fact is that Beria actually arrested only Ogoltsov on April 4, 1953, and neither Ogoltsov nor any of the other "participants," apparently, had even heard until their deaths that they were accused of Mikhoels' murder.
Now everyone's writing that Tsanava was arrested along with Ogoltsov. Nothing of the sort! Tsanava, who had been dismissed from the MGB back in 1952, as Sudoplatov writes, "was arrested only six months later, not for participating in Mikhoels' murder, but as a member of 'Beria's gang.'"
Shubnyakov was arrested in 1951, along with Abakumov, as a member of a Jewish conspiracy within the MGB. As soon as Beria took over the combined MGB-MVD, Shubnyakov was immediately released and, on March 17, became deputy head of the 1st Main Directorate. After Beria's assassination, Shubnyakov was not included in his "gang" and continued to serve as deputy head of the 1st and then 2nd Main Directorates of the KGB. And he likely had no idea that Beria had "arrested him for the murder of Mikhoels and stripped him of his medals."
After Beria's assassination, Khrushchev immediately fired Ogoltsov, but he was denied a position—he was in the KGB's Personnel Directorate, and then in the reserves. Perhaps he began to behave somewhat insolently toward Khrushchev, since in 1958 the Party Control Committee of the CPSU Central Committee reviewed his case and expelled him from the Party. But the Committee's minutes make no mention of Mikhoels. Ogoltsov was expelled for falsifying records in 1941 in Leningrad (which, incidentally, was a blatant falsification on the part of the Party Control Committee itself, as Ogoltsov had no such record at the time.—A.M.).
That is, in reality, not only was there no murder of Mikhoels, but Beria did not arrest anyone in connection with it.
Question: then why was it necessary to concoct and plant mountains of fakes in the archives regarding this case?…
... Answer: his death can be passed off as an MGB special operation. Why? Because then it would explain why Beria arrested Ogoltsov and conceal the true reason for his arrest (Beria arrested him for his direct involvement in Stalin's assassination. – A.M.).
While I agree with Yuri Mukhin's conclusion, which is fair and objective, as it is based on documents and facts, I would add the following. The officials from the CPSU Central Committee who deliberately falsified this case, for some reason, strictly followed the 1952 NATO Council resolution on inciting anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe and the USSR. Even decades later, they were still digging the earth to implement the NATO Council resolution!
Let's now move away from citing S. Mironin's book and rely on the data of Yu. I. Mukhin. In his brilliantly argued book, "The Assassination of Stalin and Beria," which has now gone through several editions, he draws attention to the colossal role in exacerbating these tensions played by the opening of the Israeli embassy in Moscow, headed by its ambassador, Golda Meir, who later became the famous Israeli Prime Minister. More precisely, it was the reaction of the Jewish population of the USSR to the opening of this embassy. The fact is that just a month after the embassy's arrival in Moscow, during a visit to a Moscow synagogue on October 3, 1948, Golda Meir was met with an unprecedentedly united demonstration of Soviet Jews' commitment to Israel, which was repeated just ten days later, on the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur. A huge number of Jews from all over the USSR—50,000 in all—came to Moscow.
Having carefully analyzed this circumstance, Mukhin emphasizes that the Soviet government was stunned by such a demonstration of pro-Israeli sentiment. And to a large extent, by the organizational aspect of this demonstration. After all, someone had organized such a massive gathering. At that time, Mukhin rightly points out, travel within the country was objectively difficult. The post-war devastation was still acute. There were not enough trains, carriages, or locomotives. And at that time, travel on freight trains was punishable by a year in a labor camp. And yet, on someone's orders, tens of thousands of Jews from all over the USSR were given sudden vacations or fictitious sick leave, and were helped to purchase tickets to Moscow, not to mention the fact that their accommodation—50,000 of them!—was also organized in Moscow. It was absolutely clear that some organization had managed to accomplish this in the shortest possible time. Once again, I ask you to pay attention to the fact that the Israeli embassy arrived in Moscow on September 3, 1948, and already on October 3 and especially on October 13, Golda Meir was treated to an unprecedentedly powerful demonstration of sympathy from Soviet Jews for Israel.
Yury Mukhin, not without sarcasm, notes that even in 1957, when the post-war devastation had already been overcome, the military had to be called in to save Khrushchev, whom the old guard intended to strip of all positions in the party and state. They transported Central Committee officials on military transport planes to attend the plenum. This was despite the fact that there were only 125 of them at the time, many of whom lived in Moscow. Nevertheless, Defense Minister Zhukov's assistance was needed to urgently transport them to Moscow.
And it was the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee that was able to accomplish what even the Presidium of the Central Committee had proven beyond its power a decade later. Through its actions, the JAC fully and unequivocally demonstrated that it had completely transcended its original functions (which, moreover, had lost all relevance with the end of World War II) and transformed itself into a kind of authority parallel to the Soviet government, charged with representing the interests of the Jewish population of the Soviet Union.
A brief comment. In this regard, a written confession by the USSR Prosecutor General R. Rudenko is quite curious. Although he was inclined to dance to Khrushchev's tune, he couldn't ignore the irrefutable facts, even though he tried to soften the edges. In 1955, having prepared a memo for the Politburo on the rehabilitation of S. Lozovsky, a former member of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) arrested in the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee case, Rudenko noted: “The investigation established that certain leaders of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee, for nationalist motives, attempted to appropriate functions to the committee that were clearly inappropriate for it, interfering on behalf of the committee in resolving issues regarding the employment of individuals of Jewish nationality, initiating petitions for the release of Jewish prisoners from camps, making nationalist statements in their literary works, etc. These improper actions objectively led to Jewish nationalist elements attempting to group around the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee.”
Meanwhile, such a situation clearly fell under the jurisdiction of Article 58/1 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, which stated: "Any action aimed at overthrowing, undermining, or weakening the power of workers' and peasants' councils and the workers' and peasants' governments of the USSR, union and autonomous republics elected by them, on the basis of the Constitution of the USSR and the constitutions of the union republics, or at undermining and weakening the external security of the USSR and the fundamental economic, political, and national gains of the proletarian revolution, is recognized as counterrevolutionary." In other words, by its actions, the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee essentially acknowledged its transformation into an anti-Soviet and counterrevolutionary organization, almost openly opposing the government of the USSR!
The Soviet leadership's reaction was unequivocal: on November 20, 1948, the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee was abolished. In early 1949, a number of JAC members were expelled from the party and arrested, but their cases were not brought to trial until 1952. A total of 431 people were arrested in this case, of whom 217 were writers and poets, 108 were actors, 87 were artists, and 19 were musicians.
All preliminary testimony from those arrested in this case, as well as all materials collected by state security agencies, were carefully reviewed by the Politburo. Furthermore, Politburo member and Chairman of the Communist Party of China (CPC), M. Shkiryatov, met with each of the accused in prison and held a private conversation with them. All of them confirmed their guilt to Shkiryatov and, I ask you to pay special attention to this, did not complain that their confessions were made under torture or duress. Only after being convinced of the guilt of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee's leadership did the Politburo agree to transfer the case to the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR.
The court, presided over by General A.A. Cheptsov, heard the case of 15 individuals publicly from May 8 to July 18, 1952—a total of 72 days. This means the trial was very thorough. Furthermore, it was conducted "without the participation of the parties"—there was no prosecutor in court, and therefore no state prosecution. The defendants were accused of their own confessions, which they could easily have retracted. However, only four of the 15—Lozovsky, Shimeliovich, Bregman, and Markish—took advantage of this opportunity. Markish, however, simultaneously supported the charges brought against other Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee members for nationalism and anti-Soviet activity.
Ultimately, the trial resulted in a very harsh verdict: 14 of the 15 defendants were sentenced to death (defendant L.S. Shtern was sentenced to imprisonment in a labor camp, and after serving her sentence, to five years of exile). In total, 110 of the 431 people arrested in connection with the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (JAC) case were convicted.
A brief comment. It should be noted that on May 15, 1952, the trial of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (EAC) case was temporarily suspended—Judge Cheptsov had doubts about the investigative materials and requested further investigation. Stalin supported him. However, on May 22, the trial resumed. In this regard, Judge A.A. Cheptsov's behavior in the immediate post-Stalin era is quite remarkable. Just three years after the conclusion of the trial of the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (EAC), Khrushchev, who had been implicated in the harsh verdict, ordered the rehabilitation of those convicted in the case. And then Cheptsov suddenly wrote memos to the Central Committee and even Defense Minister Zhukov, asserting that all those convicted in the EAC case were innocent (incidentally, to this day it remains unclear what Zhukov had to do with all these cases, that he had to write such a memo).
Moreover, Cheptsov wrote outright that even at the moment the verdict was passed, he already knew they were innocent! Worse still. He brazenly deceived Khrushchev and the entire Central Committee regarding the further investigation of the case, which he had demanded in 1952. In his explanation, Cheptsov presented the story as follows: that he had gone to Malenkov, to MGB Minister Ignatiev, and to his deputy Ryumin, asking them not to try them, but to return the case for further investigation. This lie persisted for 34 years. But in 1989, yet another idiot from the Party Control Committee of the CPSU Central Committee dug up this story and officially announced that, according to testimony from Grishaev, an assistant to MGB Deputy Minister Ryumin, Cheptsov went to Ignatiev not because he considered the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee case dubious, much less because the accused were innocent, but because "those arrested had not been exposed and the roots of the crimes had not been uncovered!" In other words, in 1952, he openly believed that if the defendants were executed, it would be impossible to uncover the "roots of the crimes," and therefore demanded that Ignatiev further investigate the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee case. However, Stalin's future assassin, State Security Minister Ignatiev, decided to sweep the case under the rug, or more precisely, with the death sentence. After all, the further investigation lasted only seven days—the trial was suspended on May 15, resumed on May 22, and concluded on July 18 with a harsh verdict.
So, to summarize the essence of the JAC case, we must, in the words of S. Mironin, admit the following: "...Meir's visit catalyzed and sharply exposed the clash of interests between Jews and the Soviet state. It turned out that after the creation of the State of Israel, Soviet Jews, although far from all, would hesitate if the question arose of whom to sacrifice their lives for—the USSR or Israel—and might even prefer Israel. This formulation of the question required the immediate removal of Jews from power and ideological structures. No, this did not mean that Soviet Jews were worse than other peoples—the issue was about the elite of Soviet Jews, about those who arrogated to themselves the right to speak on behalf of Soviet Jews, those who instilled ideas of their exceptionalism in the minds of Soviet Jews.
Stalin was most likely least interested in the Jews' attitudes toward Israel and Golda Meir personally. But the extent to which the Jews were organized and who was at the forefront of the welcoming party aroused suspicion. A thorough investigation was ordered. It turned out that a powerful political group had developed within the party (and not only within it, but also within the army, etc.), tightly knit and with far-reaching plans that diverged greatly from the party's mainstream, and which was also closely connected to the West…
The Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee (JAC) leadership deliberately found itself at the forefront of these processes, effectively attempting to position itself as a special government for all Soviet Jews. Moreover, it was quite consciously oriented toward the West, with which the USSR had entered into a great confrontation in the post-war period, known as the Cold War. Along this path, a bloody clash with the then-current Soviet criminal law was fatally inevitable. Indeed, in any state, no one would tolerate even an attempt to create something sembling a parallel government to the main, constitutionally legitimate government, especially for a single ethnic group. And even more so, no one would tolerate such attempts if the organization attempting to position itself as a parallel government for a single ethnic group (in a multi-ethnic state) had a clearly defined orientation toward hostile foreign powers. This is what must always be kept in mind when someone tries to pull the wool over our eyes with all sorts of nonsense about Stalin’s anti-Semitism and Judeophobia, as a result of which, you see, he destroyed the Jewish Anti-Corruption Committee and its leaders.
Frankly, even anti-Stalinists are getting tired of Stalin's constant accusations of rabid Judeophobia and anti-Semitism. "Stalin was neither an anti-Semite, nor even a Judeophobe. Judeophobia is a morbid hatred of any representative of the Jewish nation... Stalin didn't have this. There isn't a single statement—either in his official speeches or in archival documents—that could be cited as anti-Semitic." It's worth at least briefly dwelling on this statement by Medvedev. Just think about who made this unambiguous and categorical admission!
The Medvedev brothers aren't just anti-Stalinists—they're the sons of one of Tukhachevsky's repressed accomplices, Alexander Medvedev. And they've suffered a lot because of it. That's the first point. Secondly, it would seem that they, being half-breeds—their mother, Yulia Reiman, was Jewish—and the sons of a military commander repressed in the Tukhachevsky case, would have a clear advantage in accusing Stalin of Judeophobia. But no, the brothers haven't stooped to the commonplace nonsense of ostensibly bogus democratic propaganda—based on precise documentary evidence, they categorically reject such accusations against Stalin! Moreover, even those cases involving Jews are examined not from the standpoint of Stalin's alleged Judeophobia, but solely from the perspective of the foreign and domestic political climate of the time, and they strongly recommend everyone approach these issues in precisely this way. Let's take their advice and look at the so-called repressions against prominent members of the Soviet Jewish population in the post-war period. Specifically, regarding the so-called deportation of Jews.
The myth of the so-called deportation of the Jewish population from large cities to special concentration camps in remote areas of the country is very popular among anti-Stalinists. It has existed since January 13, 1953, that is, since the publication of the article about the "Doctors' Plot" in Pravda. However, in the more than half a century that has passed, not even a single scrap of any document, or even the slightest hint of anything like this, has been found. Especially not those very "horrible lists," allegedly compiled back in February 1953, which allegedly listed millions of Jews to be deported. Even less has been found of the corresponding propaganda brochures, allegedly also printed at the same time to whip up anti-Stalinist hysteria. Incidentally, a certain V.P. has particularly "practiced" this latter, as well as the lists, in our time. Yerashov, who back in 1990 published a book called "Corridors of Death: A Historical-Fantasy Chronicle" in a print run of 250,000 copies, made "no less of a contribution" than another provocateur—a certain Sheinis—who dared to publish the vile libelous "Provocation of the Century."
The first to expose these fabrications was A.M. Borshagovsky, who published the book "Blood Accused" in 1994. His revelations are especially valuable because, in 1949, he was declared one of the leaders of the "rootless cosmopolitans." Nevertheless, Borshagovsky retained the objectivity natural to a normal person and, decades later, wrote the following:
"The exile and deportation of the country's Jews is a mythological, almost fantastical image of Stalin's desires and secret plans."
Foreign researchers, including both American (for example, V. Balan) and Israeli (I. Korshever), have taken a virtually identical position. In 1998, the honorary chairman of the Zionist Organization of Germany, prominent German public figure and scholar A. Lustiger (incidentally, a former prisoner of a Nazi death camp), published a work, "The Red Book: Stalin and the Jews," which states: "Since no evidence exists to date of any planned mass deportation of Soviet Jews... such assertions must be regarded as rumors or legends."
No less renowned and authoritative authors who have studied the topic of deportation—V. Kardin, Zh. A. Medvedev, mentioned above, and the director of the Holocaust Foundation, I. A. Altman—also concluded that Stalin did not plan such an operation. Of particular significance is the independent analysis of all the data on this issue by the outstanding ace of Soviet intelligence, the sadly late P. A. Sudoplatov, and the renowned scholar I. Shafarevich. Both categorically demonstrated the complete groundlessness of this vile rumor. And, of course, one cannot help but pay special attention to the revelation by the most authoritative specialist on the history of Jews in the USSR, G. V. Kostyrchenko, who stated in 2005: "The most painful issue was the deportation of the Jewish population to remote areas of the country, which was supposedly to be carried out at the 'request' of leading Jewish scholars, writers, specialists, and military personnel. It turned out to be a fake."
By the way, he outlined the same thing in his famous book, “Captured by the Red Pharaoh.”
However, all these very authoritative revelations will be clearly incomplete if we do not name “where the wind blew from” and who specifically carried out the “commands of the wind.”
So, the wind blew... from the session of the NATO Council, which took place at the end of 1952 and decided, as documented by Soviet intelligence, that all joint bodies of the bloc and the countries participating in the North Atlantic alliance are obliged to “truly propagate anti-Semitism in the countries of Eastern Europe (taking into account the possible negative reaction in Western circles)”! [7]
A short comment. The most prominent leader of Zionism in the 20th century, Chaim Weizmann (incidentally, also a member of the previously mentioned Committee of 300), I recall, used to say that "...in major intrigues, Jews (in particular) were used as grappling hooks"! [8] Accordingly, all historical, political and criminal responsibility for the numerous negative consequences of such use of Jews falls precisely on those who readily agree to this, believing that "...Jews are useful when they are subordinated to the interests of the whole." [9] Because, to paraphrase the remarkable statement of the wise Moscow rabbi Maaze, a session of the NATO Council makes decisions, but it is ordinary Jews who pay the price (in the original, the wise rabbi's thought sounds like this: back in the 1920s, he said that in the name of the interests of the West, "revolutions are made by the Trotskys, and the Bronsteins pay"). By the way, I would like to know whether the North Atlantic scumbags and Judeophobes have repealed their vile decree or whether it is still in effect?
By maliciously inciting anti-Semitism, the West planned to gain a real chance to openly interfere in the internal affairs of the states of this region, primarily the Soviet Union (similar to what was done in the 1970s, when the policy of détente and the normalization of Soviet-American relations was linked to the issue of the emigration of Jews from the USSR).
A brief comment. Apparently, this is precisely the context for his statement about the Jewish danger, which Stalin made at the meeting of the Presidium of the Central Committee on December 1, 1952, and which was recorded in the diary of Malyshev, one of the leaders of the USSR's military-industrial complex at the time (see the journal "Source," 1997, No. 5).
Moreover, one of the first instructions obtained by Soviet intelligence in the late 1940s from Radio Free Europe, a station fully funded by the United States, suggested: "...Use the method of inciting one nation against another, one population group against another..." Simply put, the Kremlin's policy of friendship among nations, especially the Soviet Union, categorically displeased the West. And so they resorted to the most vile and despicable methods, the use of which in polite society would be punished by being hit with a candelabra. But the West has long since abandoned the use of candles, which is a shame... A good Russian slap on the wrist is also enough...
When there's a task, there's always someone to carry it out. Sadly, such a "perpetrator" was found among Soviet Jews. Decades later, he was tracked down by the same G.V. Kostyrchenko. Just look at the theater director Iosif Nezhny. He was the one who dreamed up this abomination in 1953 and ran around Moscow spreading this vile rumor about deportation. Until the state security agencies caught up with him...
And finally, about the most important part of this entire abomination. The text of that vile article, published in Pravda on January 13, 1953, which so upset Jews both in the USSR and abroad, was adopted (along with a TASS statement) at a meeting of the Bureau of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee on January 9, 1953. Stalin was absent, and the minutes of the meeting (unlike previous ones) do not bear his personal signature. In its place stands the faceless villainy: "Bureau of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee." Moreover, the author of the brilliant book "The Assassination of Stalin and Beria," Yuri Mukhin, has convincingly demonstrated that it was the MGB that benefited from shifting the emphasis from ordinary doctors (incidentally, most of those arrested were ethnic Russians) to Jews. One small clarification to the authoritative opinion of my esteemed colleague. It was not the faceless MGB that benefited from this, but only the top leadership of the MGB, first and foremost the Minister of State Security S.D. Ignatiev and his party curator... N.S. Khrushchev!
It was at their instigation that the notorious letter from Lidiya Timashuk, which had been in A.A. Kuznetsov's archive, was read at that Politburo meeting. I emphasize again that Stalin was not present at that Politburo meeting and, naturally, he did not read anything. When it was published in the press, Stalin, according to his daughter Svetlana, was deeply distressed and said he did not believe in the dishonesty of the (Jewish) doctors.
A brief comment. Due to the allegedly strong Jewish accent of the "doctors' plot," Stalin became seriously suspicious. This was especially true since he was well aware of intelligence reports that discussed the NATO Council's decision to incite anti-Semitism. As always in particularly complex and sensitive cases, Stalin took a highly unusual approach to organizing a thorough and objective investigation of the information in this case. He had often resorted to such measures before. Thus, having failed to see a clear and realistic picture of the infamous "doctors-poisoners' plot," Stalin assigned its thorough investigation and re-examination not to a member of the Central Committee, which is highly significant, but instead asked for several candidates to be selected—people with firsthand knowledge of operational practices but who had not worked in the state security agencies for some time. As a result, he was presented with the candidacies of V. Zaychikov, P. Kolobanov, and N.N. Mesyatsev. Nothing is known about the first two except their last names, but the third, from 1943 to 1945, was the head of the investigative unit of the SMERSH R&D unit of the 5th Guards Army. At the time his candidacy was presented to Stalin, he was a graduate student at the Higher Party School. Stalin instructed these three individuals to conduct an additional, comprehensive, and very thorough investigation of the "Doctors' Plot" and to report their findings. He instructed them separately, so as to have three possible results of such an investigation and, accordingly, three possible conclusions.
But no sooner had Stalin given them this task than he himself was assassinated (poisoned). And the names of the assassins can now be named with complete certainty: N.S. Khrushchev and S.D. Ignatiev. This means they were extremely alarmed upon learning of Stalin's order. Consequently, they were the true organizers of this vile undertaking. After all, it was Khrushchev who oversaw the state security agencies at the time.
So the question arises: why did Security Minister S.D. Ignatiev and especially his party curator N.S. Khrushchev so scrupulously implement the aforementioned resolution of the NATO Council session and dig so deep into the ground to fan the flames of anti-Semitism in the country that they weren't afraid to frame Stalin himself, and then weren't afraid to kill him, just as he had organized a thorough investigation of the matter by three independent experts?! After all, these facts won't lead to any conclusion other than a specific, behind-the-scenes conspiracy between Khrushchev and Co. and influential Western forces ! Moreover, the true agents of imperialism were precisely Khrushchev and Co., and not L.P. Beria, who was falsely accused of this, and even then only six months after the vile assassination.
You see the real truth about the allegedly planned deportation of the Jewish population. But where is Stalin's rabid Judeophobia and anti-Semitism in all of this?!
Myth #182: Stalin didn't like to interact with members of the intelligentsia.
